SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(AP) 56

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
B. SESHASAYANA REDDY, J.
Kore Gattaiah
Versus
Singareni Collieries Company Ltd., Khammam District and others
WP No.27580 of 2008
Decided On : Tenth Day of February, 2009

Advocates:
Counsel appeared :A.K Jayaprakash Rao, Counsel for the Petitioner; Nandigam Krishna Rao, Counsel for the Respondents.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 –Proceedings Challenged – Petitioner Kore Gattaiah joined in service of the respondents Company as worker trainee on 24.1.1977. – He claims that he was aged 25 years as on the date of his joining in service. – He was promoted as Coal Filler and further promoted as General Mazdoor, Charger of Safety Lamps and Lamp Room Assistant. – He was sent for medical examination by the respondents Company in January, 2008. – According to him, the Apex Medical Board unilaterally determined his age as 59 years as on 24.1.2008 and notified his date of retirement as 31.1.2009. – He made representation 8.11.2008 raising objections for determination of his age as 59 years as on 24.1.2008. – The General Manager, Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Kalyani Khani Post-2nd respondent by proceedings dated 26.11.2008 rejected the objections. – It is his contention that he was aged 25 years as on the date of his joining service and therefore, he was entitled to be continued in service upto 2012. – He filed the writ petition challenging the proceeding issued by the 2nd respondent as illegal and arbitrary. – Held, In the case of appointees not covered under the foregoing clauses, the date of birth will be determined by the Colliery Medical Officer keeping in view any documentary and other relevant evidence as produced by the appointee. Date of birth as determined shall be treated as correct date of birth and the same will not be altered under any circumstances - The age of the petitioner as on the date of entry into service was recorded as 25 years. – The petitioner disputes his entry into service - There being no consistency with regard to date of entry into service, his case came to be referred to the Area Age Determination Committee, which examined the case and recommended for determination of age by the Apex Medical Board. – The Apex Medical Board examined the petitioner and assessed his age as 59 years - As per the guidelines formulated by JBCCI, the decision of the Apex Medical Board is binding on the respondents Company and the petitioner. The respondents placed on record the age assessment report of the petitioner by the Apex Medical Board. It is a matter of record that the petitioner informed the Apex Medical Board that he has no evidence to substantiate his age. – The Apex Medical Board proceeded to assess the age of the petitioner in accordance with the guidelines and issued assessment report, relevant portion of which reads as hereunder - Accordingly, the writ petition is devoid of merits and the same is hereby dismissed.

ORDER :-

Petitioner Kore Gattaiah joined in service of the respondents Company as worker trainee on 24.1.1977. He claims that he was aged 25 years as on the date of his joining in service. He was promoted as Coal Filler and further promoted as General Mazdoor, Charger of Safety Lamps and Lamp Room Assistant. He was sent for medical examination by the respondents Company in January, 2008. According to him, the Apex Medical Board unilaterally determined his age as 59 years as on 24.1.2008 and notified his date of retirement as 31.1.2009. He made representation 8.11.2008 raising objections for determination of his age as 59 years as on 24.1.2008. The General Manager, Singareni Collieries Company Limited, Kalyani Khani Post-2nd respondent by proceedings dated 26.11.2008 rejected the objections. It is his contention that he was aged 25 years as on the date of his joining service and therefore, he was entitled to be continued in service upto 2012. He filed the writ petition challenging the proceeding No.MMR/PER/S/171/08/5965, dated 26.11.2008, issued by the 2nd respondent as illegal and arbitrary.

2. Rule Nisi came to be issued on 28.12.2008.

3. The respondents filed counter affidavit stating that the petitioner was examined by the doctor on the date of his initial appointment and assessed his age as 25 years and the same was entered in B-Register, Service Record and Coal Mines Provident Fund records. In view of the discrepancy with regard to the date of entry into service, his case was referred to the Area Age Determination Committee, which considered the material placed on record and recommended to refer the case of the petitioner to the Apex Medial Board for assessment of correct age. The petitioner affixed his signature on the proceedings of the Area Age Determination Committee in token of acceptance of the proceedings. The Apex Medical Board had reviewed the case of the petitioner on 24.1.2008 at Main Hospital, Kothagudem. The petitioner appeared before the Apex Medical Board and informed of not having any evidence as proof of his date of birth. Thereupon, the Apex Medical Board conducted required medical examinations and arrived at a conclusion that the petitioner was aged 59 years as on 24.1.2008. As per the guidelines formulated by the IDCCI, the decision of the Apex Medical Board is binding on the respondents Company and the petitioner. The contention of the petitioner that the Apex Medical Board did not examine him medically has been denied. Paras 8 and 9 of the counter affidavit need to be noted and they are thus:

"8. In reply to averments in Para 9, it is submitted that every coal miner will be a member of Coal Mines Provident Fund and the details relating to date of birth/age, date of appointment, nominee, dependents of every employee will be sent to the Regional Commissioner, Coal Mines Provident Fund, while submitting the nomination forms executed by every employee for the record of the office of Regional Commissioner, CMPF. Further, the JBCCI Implementation Instructions No.76 with regard to resolving disputes relating to age; clearly indicate the fact that the age as entered in CMPF records should be taken as final. Hence, it becomes obligatory on the part of the respondents to ascertain the entries with regard to date of appointment and date of birth of the petitioner as per the records maintained in the office of Regional Commissioner, CMPF, Godavari Khani and hence, a request was made to this effect. In response to this the Asst. Commissioner, Coal Mines Provident Fund, Godavari Khani clarified that ".... as per our records, the date of appointment of Sri Kora Gattaiah S/o. Iylaiah, LR.A, KK-1 Incline, bearing CMPF No.H48/652 is 24.1.1977. Hence, the contribution particulars prior to his appointment does not arise whereas date of birth is concerned, nomination is not available to mention date of birth." The contention of the petitioner that the respondent had alleged that the petitioner had worked prior to his date of






























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top